ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2023
Hearing loss, hearing aid use, and performance on the Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA): findings from the HUNT study in Norway.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cognitive Disorders In Acquired Sensorineural Hearing Loss, At The Ent Department Of The "Village Bondeko" Center, In Kinshasa.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2025Article
- Real-life intrinsic capacity screening data from the ICOPE-Care program.Nature aging · 2024Article
- Hearing Loss and Cognitive Impairment Among Community-Dwelling Older Adults - Liaoning, Henan, and Guangdong Provinces, China, 2019-2020.China CDC weekly · 2024Article
- Hearing Loss: The Silent Pandemic That is Finally Being Heard.Missouri medicineArticle
- Cognitive assessment in hearing aid clinics: Is it feasible to implement in a National Health Service (NHS) setting?Science progressArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the associations between hearing status and hearing aid use and performance on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) in older adults in a cross-sectional study in Norway. Methods: This study utilized data from the fourth wave of the Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT4, 2017-2019). Hearing thresholds at frequencies of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz (or PTA4) in the better hearing ear were used to determine participants' hearing status [normal hearing (PTA4 hearing threshold, ≤ 15 dB), or slight (PTA4, 16-25 dB), mild (PTA4, 26-40 dB), moderate (PTA4, 41-55 dB), or severe (PTA4, ≥ 56 dB) hearing loss]. Both standard scoring and alternate MoCA scoring for people with hearing loss (deleting MoCA items that rely on auditory function) were used in data analysis. The analysis was adjusted for the confounders age, sex, education, and health covariates. Results: The pattern of results for the alternate scoring was similar to that for standard scoring. Compared with the normal-hearing group, only individuals with moderate or severe hearing loss performed worse in the MoCA. In addition, people with slight hearing loss performed better in the MoCA than those with moderate or severe hearing loss. Within the hearing loss group, hearing aid use was associated with better performance in the MoCA. No interaction was observed between hearing aid use and participants' hearing status with performance on the MoCA test. Conclusion: While hearing loss was associated with poorer performance in the MoCA, hearing aid use was found to be associated with better performance in the MoCA. Future randomized control trials are needed to further examine the efficacy of hearing aid use on the MoCA performance. When compared with standard scoring, the alternate MoCA scoring had no effect on the pattern of results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.